The sea is behind these newly reconstructed houses. There is still some debris of houses damaged as a result of tsunami 2004 still in the vicinity.
Relationships
7. The Impact of Forced Relocation on Housing, Common
Infrastructure, Other Services and Social Relationships
This chapter is divided into two parts: the first attempts to explain the numerous inconveniences most of the resettlers encountered as a result of inferior housing and lack of common infrastructure in the new settlements. The second part mainly examines the relationship between the host and resettled communities. It further examines how tensions and some physical conflicts with the two groups disturb the peaceful atmosphere of resettled areas.
7
7..11..PPoooorrQQuuaalliittyyHHoouussiinngg
As stated before, resettlers had high aspirations of living in well built houses with basic common infrastructure, as promised by government authorities and politicians when they were in temporary camps and or in transitory shelters. This is evident from Pradeep’s (daily paid labourer) statement about the Katupolwaththa resettlement, “I thought this
resettlement was the best one in the area and I came here with high hopes of getting a good house with common infrastructure and facilities. We were in a transitory shelter for more than one year under very difficult conditions, and I was in a desperate situation to move into any permanent place as soon as possible.” Nevertheless, after settling in their
new settlements, it took only few months for them to personally experience the poor quality of the house they are now residing in. Pradeep further said, “All our aspirations
were shattered after coming to this settlement”. There was much frustration with the
quality of house construction.
A question was posed in order to ascertain which houses were comparatively better present or previous dwelling. Overall percentages indicate that a significant proportion of interviewed householders are of the view that the house that they lived in before the tsunami were better (78%) when compared to their present one (22%). With regard to the location, it is evident that a higher proportion of householders in Tea Garden (85%) and Katupolwaththa (81%) thought their previous house was in a better location when compared to Cinnamon Garden (61%) householders (see Table 28).
Relationships
Table 28: Preferred Housing by Location
Location
Preferred House Tea Garden1
(%) Katupolwaththa2 (%) Cinnamon Garden3 (%) Overall4 (%)
House lived in before tsunami 85 61 81 78
Present house 15 39 19 22
Notes: valid n1=54, n2 =31, n3=58, n4=143. Source: Field Survey.
When the reasons were further explored, a clear majority of respondents in all three resettlements noted their dissatisfaction with poor roofing (69%), inferior walls (66%) and poor sanitation (71%) (see Table 29). With regard to location, a significant proportion of householders of Katupolwaththa complained about leaking roofs during the rainy season (90%) and cracked walls (83%), while a significant proportion of Cinnamon Garden resettlers complained about lavatories with stagnant waste water and overflowing septic tanks (82%).
Table 29: Satisfaction with Elements of the House by Location
Satisfactory roofing Tea Garden1 (%) Katupolwaththa2 (%) Cinnamon Garden3 (%) Overall4 (%) Yes 35 10 37 31 No 65 90 63 69 Satisfactory walls Yes 31 17 44 34 No 69 83 56 66 Satisfactory toilets Yes 39 31 18 29 No 61 69 82 71
Notes: valid n1=54, n2 =29, n3=57, n4=140. Source: Field Survey.
This situation is further explained by Mahinda (52 yrs), a fisherman in Katupolwaththa: “The floor of toilet is not levelled, therefore, the waste water gets stagnant. A small
cylinder is buried in place of a proper sceptic tank to remove sewage. As a result, we have to clean it every three months which requires Rs.3,900, although the first cleaning was done for free with the assistance of a municipal council member at Galle Municipal Council. During rainy days, the situation gets worse as the rain water spills into it and it overflows as there is no system to properly drain the rain water outside the housing premises. Heated arguments are reported among neighbours when some do not clean
Relationships
their overflowing septic tank properly, as others cannot bear the bad smell. The roof is not properly constructed therefore, when it rains, it leaks and the floor gets wet (see
Photo 12) and needs to be covered in furniture and other items. Every day we blame the
people who are responsible for the construction of this house”.
Similar to Mahinda, Sriyalatha from the same resettlement explained: “the walls are cracked,
there is no separate place for the kitchen, water comes inside the house from the roof (as the asbestos sheets which have been put on to cover the roof are damaged) as well as from the bottom (as the houses were built on low lying land without constructing a proper drainage system)”.
Gunadasa (60 yrs) of Cinnamon Garden is critical of the construction of toilets and faces problems similar to Mahinda and Sriyalatha, although he belongs to a different settlement. Gunadasa also expressed his discomfort of staying in the house during the day time because the house heats up as a result of using corrugated sheets to cover the roof. Similar complaints such as stagnant waste water in toilets due to uneven flooring, water leaks owing to the use of poor quality pipe fittings, and cracks in the cement floor are also reported from Tea Garden. Irrespective of the poor quality housing and the daily struggle of living in the resettled areas, a few resettlers who were squatters on government owned land before relocation, are satisfied with the housing conditions as they are now better off than before and have a permanent place to stay with a secure land title, although they have not yet received the original deeds from the relevant authorities (see 7.2.7).
Photo 12: Water Leaking from the Roof of